Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 16th, 2013, 10:57 AM   #71

Frog33inUK's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Ringmer, UK, but originally ma belle Gascogne.
Posts: 1,196

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brunel View Post
Britain, unlike France and most of continental Europe, is a fully functioning democracy and in our democracy - the oldest surviving democracy in the world - the British people will decide what policies are acceptable in their country, nobody else.
OK. what does it have to do with anything ?

And yeah, a democracy in which the Head of State is unelected, one out of two parliamentary chambers is unelected, and the PM running the country is unelected but rather appointed by an elected majority, which is not exactly the same as directly electing the individual.
Frog33inUK is offline  
Remove Ads
Old January 16th, 2013, 01:50 PM   #72

Gudenrath's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
From: Denmark
Posts: 2,530
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frog33inUK View Post
OK. what does it have to do with anything ?
I have learned that the more bombastic a statement Brunel puts forth, the less facts are actually contained in the statement. This is one of those cases. Very much so indeed.
Gudenrath is online now  
Old January 17th, 2013, 06:08 AM   #73
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Bolton, UK
Posts: 1,749

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frog33inUK View Post

a democracy in which the Head of State is unelected
Britain is democracy in which the Head of State is not a politician so its Head of State doesn't need to be elected. Britain has a ceremonial Head of State with almost no powers and electing such a Head of State will be a complete waste of both time and money. The Irish might think it's a good idea to elect a ceremonial Head of State with almost no powers but I don't want Britain to go down that route.

Quote:
one out of two parliamentary chambers is unelected
Again, the last thing Britain wants is an elected upper chamber. An elected upper chamber would become too big for its boots and it would be only a matter of time before it starts challenging the supremacy of the Commons, which is something we don't want. We don't want to go down the same route as the United States, a country which has an elected upper chamber which is getting too big for its boots as a result.

Quote:
and the PM running the country is unelected but rather appointed by an elected majority
Britain is a parliamentary democracy and in a parliamentary democracy the people choose which party they want to lead their country, not which person. The PM is merely the head of the elected party. In Britain we vote for the PARTY and its POLICIES, not a mere personality as they do in America, France and elsewhere. The PM is merely an image of party policy.

It's either PARTY POLICY or PERSONALITY. I know which system I prefer and it's the former, the system Britain uses.
Brunel is offline  
Old January 17th, 2013, 08:57 PM   #74

jdghgh's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 339

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brunel View Post
Ban the building of new mosques and keep tabs on Britain's Muslims to ensure they behave.
Oh dear.
jdghgh is offline  
Old January 17th, 2013, 10:46 PM   #75

Pacific_Victory's Avatar
SEMISOMNVS
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: MARE PACIFICVM
Posts: 4,740

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brunel View Post
England and Normandy became the same kingdom in 1066.

That kingdom ended when France stole the southern half of it from King John.
Well if there is any modern day territory grabbing to be done, I would say the Normans have a better claim on England than the English do on Normandy! The Normans were the ones who actually did the conquering...

But seriously, I wonder what would have happened if the British soldiers had simply refused to leave after landing there on D-Day
Pacific_Victory is offline  
Old January 18th, 2013, 07:11 AM   #76
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Bolton, UK
Posts: 1,749

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacific_Victory View Post
Well if there is any modern day territory grabbing to be done, I would say the Normans have a better claim on England than the English do on Normandy! The Normans were the ones who actually did the conquering...

One part of Normandy belongs to Britain as a British Crown Dependency. The rest of Normandy should also, at least, belong to Britain as a British Crown Dependency. And it would have been had the French not taken it from King John. And it still should be.
Brunel is offline  
Old January 18th, 2013, 10:17 AM   #77

Frog33inUK's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Ringmer, UK, but originally ma belle Gascogne.
Posts: 1,196

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brunel View Post
You wouldn't say that if new mosques with their intimidating minarets were springing up all over Canadian towns and cities.

It's alright you saying that, but when Canadian cities have huge Islamic areas like they have in Britain in which men with long beards walk down the street with their womenfolk walking five paces behind them and any non-Muslim, especially women, feel intimidated when they walk through those areas, maybe you come to a different point of view.
Can you please stop polluting this forum with your - rather inappropriate - political manifesto...

We don't care.

And this is not the time and place.

If a moderator is around ...

Last edited by Frog33inUK; January 18th, 2013 at 11:33 AM.
Frog33inUK is offline  
Old January 18th, 2013, 12:20 PM   #78

astafjevs's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Bristol, England
Posts: 744

I find the idea that Normandy 'should' be part of England and not France absolutely absurd. It belonged to the English crown for less than 200 years, and it was lost over 700 years ago.
astafjevs is offline  
Old January 18th, 2013, 12:37 PM   #79
Citizen
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 13

Quote:
Originally Posted by History Chick View Post
That's a bit extreme. If we locked up everyone who misunderstood any little piece of information, we'd all be in jail!
What do you expect from a UKIP supporter?
John Berrow is offline  
Old January 19th, 2013, 04:05 AM   #80
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Bolton, UK
Posts: 1,749

Quote:
Originally Posted by astafjevs View Post
it was lost over 700 years ago.
It wouldn't have been lost for over 700 years had the French king not stolen it from the English king in the early 1200s.
Brunel is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
england, france, kingdom, norman, united


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Timeline for castle building in norman england interest Medieval and Byzantine History 2 December 15th, 2011 07:28 PM
Serfdom in England and the Norman Invasion Crowned Prince European History 6 September 2nd, 2011 11:01 AM
What happened to the Norman's lands in England? max Wigglesworth European History 12 December 23rd, 2010 12:00 AM
when did norman rule end in england ? forthaven European History 7 January 8th, 2010 02:16 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.